Doug Schepers wrote:
>
> Hi, Henri-
>
> Henri Sivonen wrote (on 10/12/2007 7:23 AM):
>>
>> We don't do inline SVG in text/html yet. Personally, I hope we'll get
>> there. However, if we do, the main SVG complications will be the xlink
>> mapping, the /> syntax and SVG-native camelCaps. I don't think it is a
>> good idea to introduce more complications if we are already
>> entertaining inline SVG in text/html as a possibility.
>
> Thanks for outlining the challenges to integrating SVG into text/html,
> from an HTML5 standpoint. That's very helpful.
>
> I also want that to happen, and would like to facilitate that when the
> time comes. Also like you, I do have certain concerns about how it's
> done. I'll give you my viewpoint (which is not necessarily shared by
> the rest of the SVG or CDF WGs).
>
> From a technical and market viewpoint (an odd pairing, perhaps), I feel
> very strongly that SVG-in-HTML should maintain identical markup syntax
> with standalone SVG (or SVG-in-XHTML, and probably X/HTML-in-SVG); any
> differences between the two syntaces would be actively harmful to SVG.
> For example, someone who copy-pasted an SVG fragment from HTML and tried
> to use it as a standalone file, or imported it into an SVG file (perhaps
> in an automated mashup) would get unexpected and probably disastrous
> results. Those inconsistencies would leave casual authors with a bad
> impression of SVG, and force advanced authors to make elaborate
> workarounds. The goal, from the perspective of the SVG WG, would be to
> make it easier --not harder-- for authors, and to increase the use of
> SVG (and specifically not to drive authors into the hands of vendors of
> proprietary formats). I'm not saying that the SVG WG is not willing to
> consider reasonable compromises, just that the end result of should be a
> uniform syntax for SVG.
>
> From a logistics standpoint, this work should be done in coordination
> between the HTML, SVG, and CDF Working Groups. All have a vested
> interest in it, and each has a unique set of perspectives, needs, and
> knowledge. Perhaps we can begin talking about it at the upcoming Tech
> Plenary. We are all busy with other things right now, but opening the
> dialog will prepare us for what we'll need to consider going forward.
Doug, I don't know if you are familiar with my website, but I have been
deploying inline SVG on pages for quite some time now. In any case,
there are some real issues that need to be worked out. Examples include
what <![CDATA[ ]>> means, and how tags like <script> are handled by SVG
unaware browsers. (Possibly <title> too, but that turns out to be less
of an issue).
Related:
http://intertwingly.net/blog/2007/09/11/SVG-on-IE-via-Silverlight-Revisitedhttp://intertwingly.net/blog/2007/08/02/HTML5-and-Distributed-Extensibility
- Sam Ruby